GLOBAL GROWTH Membantu DS Najib Menang 2/3 Majoriti PRU 14

DS Najib Perdana Menteri yang bijak membawa Malaysia menunggang gelombang perubahan ekonomi dunia yang semakin mencabar penuh keyakinan.

Polisi 'friendly' berbaik-baik dengan pemimpin-pemimpin berpengaruh dunia memudahkan urusan.

Tidak guna tunjuk retorik berapi-berapi menentang pemimpin-pemimpin berpengaruh dunia depan rakyat konon aku pemimpin paling berani dan lantang tapi tidak boleh bawa pelaburan FDI.

DS Najib dengan inisiatif beliau berjaya membawa pelaburan beratus billion Ringgit dari China, India dan Arab dari rantau Asia sahaja.

Belum lagi pelaburan yang bernilai tinggi dari Eropah dan US. Semua usaha-usaha ini membantu pertumbuhan ekonomi Malaysia.

Pertumbuhan ekonomi dunia ( Global Growth) yang semakin baik dan elok boleh membantu DS Najib menang majoriti lebih 2/3 pada PRU 14.

Hanya penyelesaian ekonomi yang boleh buat semua orang menarik nafas lega dan dapat berfikir dengan rasional membuat keputusan.

Retorik pembangkang tanpa penyelesaian holistik menyeluruh tanpa usaha-usaha positif berpolitik 24 jam sepanjang masa tidak dapat membantu.

Bagaimana Global Growth dapat membantu DS Najib menang 2/3 majoriti?

Beberapa penulisan dari pakar-pakar ekonomi dunia terkemuka menulis...

Kenneth Rogoff, Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Harvard University and recipient of the 2011 Deutsche Bank Prize in Financial Economics, was the chief economist of the International Monetary Fund from 2001 to 2003. The co-author of This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly, his newBOOK, The Curse of Cash, was released in August 2016.

After nine dreary years of downgrading their GDP forecasts, macroeconomic policymakers around the world are shaking their heads in disbelief: Despite a populist-propelled wave of political tumult, global growth is actually set to outperform expectations in 2017.

It’s not just American exceptionalism. Although US growth is very strong, Europe has been outperforming expectations by more. There is even happy news for emerging markets, which are still bracing for US Federal Reserve interest-rate hikes but have gained a better backdrop against which to adjust.

Fortunately, a patient Fed, a resilient (for now) China, and a growing Europe and US will help most emerging economies.

The outlook for global growth is improving, and, with sensible policies, the next several years could be quite a bit better than the last – certainly for advanced economies, and perhaps for most others as well. But populism remains a wildcard, and only if growth picks up fast enough is it likely to be kept out of play.

Anne-Marie Slaughter, a former director of policy planning in the US State Department (2009-2011), is President and CEO of the think tank New America, Professor Emerita of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University, and the author of Unfinished Business: Women Men Work Family.

The standard way of describing political forces ranging from Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party in Hungary to Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France to Donald Trump’s supporters in the United States is “populist.” 

Populism means a politics of the people, juxtaposed against a politics of the elites. But in the US at least, Trump’s ideology – which has little to do with traditional Republican conservatism – frames the axis of division not as the many versus the few, but as nationalists versus globalists.

Feelings of being disconnected and despised, however, are powerful emotions, strong enough to twist facts into a dark alternate reality. It is critical to look beyond a simple story of populism, of masses versus elites. A narrative of grounded, connected nationalism versus sanctimonious free-floating globalism is one that will generate support and staying power even among many well-educated people.

The right response is not to deny the existence or legitimacy of a desire to stay grounded amid tumultuous change, or love of country and culture, much less to look down on the less educated. It is to build a new narrative of patriotism, culture, connection, and inclusion. Even if Wilders lost this month and Le Pen loses in May, they and their supporters will not be going away.

Jeremy Adelman is Director of the Global History Lab at Princeton University.

Anne-Laure Delatte is Director of the Centre d’Études Prospectives et d’Informations Internationale, Paris.

 “America first,” thumps Donald Trump. “Britain first,” say the advocates of Brexit. “France first,” crows Marine Le Pen and her National Front. “Russia first,” proclaims Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin. With so much emphasis on national sovereignty nowadays, globalization appears doomed.

It’s not. The struggle playing out today is not one of globalism versus anti-globalism. Rather, the world is poised between two models of integration: one is multilateral and internationalist; the other is bilateral and imperialist. Throughout the modern age, the world has seesawed between them.

Since 1945, internationalists have had the upper hand. They advocate cooperation and multilateral institutions to promote global public goods like peace, security, FINANCIAL stability, and environmental sustainability. Theirs is a model that constrains national sovereignty by binding states to shared norms, conventions, and treaties.

The year 2016 tipped the scales toward bilateralists, who regard national sovereignty as an end in itself. The fewer external constraints, the better: peace and security result from a balance of great powers. Theirs is a model that favors the strong and punishes the weak, and that rewards competitors at the expense of cooperators.